this post was submitted on 29 Jul 2024
345 points (99.1% liked)

politics

19077 readers
4181 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 17 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 30 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Hell yeah do it. I wonder what he'll be able to accomplish.

I didn't expect his wealth tax or green new deal to go through, and he got em passed. Shoot, and minority legal funding.

He'll get something through.

Sure hope it's presidential immunity reversal or term limits, that shits is crazy.

[–] ZombieMantis 0 points 3 months ago

Almost impossible, given the current composition of the HoR, but this is getting the ball rolling, legislation is already being drafted, campaigns gearing up over these issues. If the Democrat's win both chambers of Congress and the Presidency, Harris will be the one signing these bills into law.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Good luck with that. They’re already bought and paid for. They owe no loyalty to Biden or democrats.

[–] BrokenGlepnir 16 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Or to the average american

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 months ago

Especially not them.

[–] unitymatters 7 points 3 months ago (1 children)

In regards to term limits of Supreme Court justices, some say that only a constitutional amendment could enforce term limits, as current proposed legislation would be unconstitutional. They argue that the relegation of judges to a new form of senior status (described in past bill proposals) runs afoul to the constitutional provision allowing justices to serve "in good Behaviour", according to Article III Section 1. President Biden supports a system where a President would appoint a justice every 2 years and justices would serve 18 year terms on the Supreme Court.

https://ace-usa.org/blog/research/research-democratic-governance/pros-and-cons-of-enacting-supreme-court-term-limits/

[–] Bahnd 1 points 3 months ago

I think they are correct, an amendment would be the appropriate form for this change as the constitution says what ever 5 of the 9 of the justices say it does.